TX Bill
Player Valuation: £80m
What are the chances?
Probably about as good as this:
German Boy Gets Hit by Meteorite Traveling 30,000MpH - The 14-year-old teenager has miraculously survived - Softpedia
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Work for free?
- Thread starter Goat
- Start date
- Status
Probably about as good as this:
German Boy Gets Hit by Meteorite Traveling 30,000MpH - The 14-year-old teenager has miraculously survived - Softpedia
Whitebootman
Player Valuation: £35m
******* incredible. What a brass neck that feller's got.
Same, but with more venom against the idiot at BA who thought that one up.
The thing is, BA are losing money hand over fist. They do need to streamline their operation in a big way. This seems to me to be a fudge to put off making mass redundancies. We've done a lot of research into redundancies since the crunch has hit and a surprising number of people would happily take a short-term hit such as this if it meant that their job was safe in the long-term.
The whole move however seems to suggest that BA's problems are solely down to fuel prices and other externalities rather than any internal issues. Walsh seems to think that by doing this short-term measure that once the crunch has passed they'll revert back to profit and things will be hunky dory again. I'm not so sure.
The whole move however seems to suggest that BA's problems are solely down to fuel prices and other externalities rather than any internal issues. Walsh seems to think that by doing this short-term measure that once the crunch has passed they'll revert back to profit and things will be hunky dory again. I'm not so sure.
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
Maybe I'm not seeing it, but those surveys you link to (Glassdoor and 2009 salary survey) dont suggest employees are willing to take the drastic action of working for nothing for an extended period, as per the BA appeal. Willing to be redeployed, take more holidays, or work a few extra hours, maybe.
From the Glassdoor survey
Strictly speaking it's not the same but it does show that people are willing to think in the longer term at the moment.
Either way, not a great strategy by Walsh.
Strictly speaking it's not the same but it does show that people are willing to think in the longer term at the moment.
Either way, not a great strategy by Walsh.
Whitebootman
Player Valuation: £35m
Seems to me that BA have many options, such as redeployment or time off in lieu of extra hours worked, but have chosen the option of asking low paid workers to work for nothing. There is another term for this employment option, Slavery. Why can't these senior managers see how close to the line their staff live. I earn a lot more than minimum wage, but if I loose a weeks pay I would strugle to pay my bills at the end of the month. Just because a high earner can manager does not mean everyone can.
I'm furious here. Maybe I should just shut up. Management, (senior management), where I work have just stuffed me with an act of pure age discrimination. I'm snapping at every management decision today.
I'm furious here. Maybe I should just shut up. Management, (senior management), where I work have just stuffed me with an act of pure age discrimination. I'm snapping at every management decision today.
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
But even slaves got food and shelter from their owners, this Walsh character just wants them to work and drop.
Being serious for a second, I think what we might be seeing here with this BA pitch is the result of living through the age of the rise and rise of the 'third sector' - taking up voluntary employment in the hope of picking up skills for an ever changing de-skilling and re-sklling global economy blah, blah, blah. The notion of unpaid work has been established, BA are testing how deep the mindset runs.
The interesting (but unsurprising) rather large elephant in the room, which hasn't been addressed by anyone that I've seen, is why the workers who are happy to accept this aren't paid the equivalent of their foregone wages in supplementary BA shares (which would then involve both capital and labour in this pain-sharing exercise).
But we seem to live in an Alice-type Tony Blair world of the Victorian era where rights for the rich and for capital outweigh any benefits for workers and labour. Of course, none of the workers who lose their jobs should worry, because the rich in our society will be more than happy to donate excess income above their personal needs to the less well-off (or so the theory goes).
But we seem to live in an Alice-type Tony Blair world of the Victorian era where rights for the rich and for capital outweigh any benefits for workers and labour. Of course, none of the workers who lose their jobs should worry, because the rich in our society will be more than happy to donate excess income above their personal needs to the less well-off (or so the theory goes).
On the assumption that BA is unprofitable, hence their need to resort to such measures, would you all be happy with mass redundancies then?
If costs are too high something has to give. I beieve BA pays staff above the industry norms and there is a nice final salary pension harking back to the days when it was a nationalised concern. So it's hard to say that BA treats its staff badly.
Willie Walsh is way off the radar in flights of fancy about BA salary breaks - Telegraph
Plus this from the Times
Video: British Airways asks staff to work for free - Times Online
As I've said already, I don't think this is a good move because it neither tackles the underlying issues or preserves morale amongst employees but there is really no need for flagrant capitalism bashing and scaremongering that BA employees are somehow on the breadline.
If costs are too high something has to give. I beieve BA pays staff above the industry norms and there is a nice final salary pension harking back to the days when it was a nationalised concern. So it's hard to say that BA treats its staff badly.
Willie Walsh is way off the radar in flights of fancy about BA salary breaks - Telegraph
Plus this from the Times
Video: British Airways asks staff to work for free - Times Online
As I've said already, I don't think this is a good move because it neither tackles the underlying issues or preserves morale amongst employees but there is really no need for flagrant capitalism bashing and scaremongering that BA employees are somehow on the breadline.
The question was a simple one, why not ask for share-owners - as one leg of an enterprise - to do their bit to help the company on an equitable basis with those who are providing the labour - another leg of an enterprise?
(If I really wanted to bash capitalism - and what is sacrilegious about doing that? - I would mention share loans, shorting and hedge funds, for example.)
(If I really wanted to bash capitalism - and what is sacrilegious about doing that? - I would mention share loans, shorting and hedge funds, for example.)
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
£39,000 avg earnings is, as the letter writer to that Times article you link explains, misleading. It takes in the pay of pilot crew which will skew the average earnings upward.
"...but there is really no need for flagrant capitalism bashing".
Do you define yourself as a capitalist?
Yeah, I'd define myself as a capitalist. It has to be remembered that earlier this month BA was contemplating 2,000 job cuts. At the risk of repeating myself, I don't think this tactic by BA is a good one, but would people be happier if 2,000 people were made permanently redundant?
As for shareholders, you could perhaps argue that they've already taken a hit if you look at the share price.
As for shareholders, you could perhaps argue that they've already taken a hit if you look at the share price.
Whitebootman
Player Valuation: £35m
Silly me. Willie Walsh is on £735,000 with bonus available of up to 100 percent of his salary. The rest of his staff are on an average of £30,000 so the cleaners and security staff must be well off and well clear of the bread line.
As for the shareholders, I lost a fiver on the grand national this year so I know how they feel. On the other hand, I understand not to gamble something I cannot afford to loose.
I'm not happy with the idea of redundancy. I've been made redundant in the past and I may well be made redundant again. It does not mean that working for nothing on the theory that it may save jobs is a workable option for everyone.
Sometimes I wish management would just get their heads out of their 'focus groups' for a while.
As for the shareholders, I lost a fiver on the grand national this year so I know how they feel. On the other hand, I understand not to gamble something I cannot afford to loose.
I'm not happy with the idea of redundancy. I've been made redundant in the past and I may well be made redundant again. It does not mean that working for nothing on the theory that it may save jobs is a workable option for everyone.
Sometimes I wish management would just get their heads out of their 'focus groups' for a while.
wow, look at that can of worms I opened. 
- Status